Legal Opinion
Stinefelt v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided July 9, 1987No. Civ. JFM-85-4244PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
MOTZ, District Judge.
This action is brought under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act. Initially, the sole defendant was the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, plaintiff’s employer. Plaintiff amended his Complaint to join as an additional defendant Kane Transfer Company, which allegedly had been retained by B & 0 as an independent contractor for the operation of a “Packer machine.” Plaintiff’s claim against Kane is for common law negligence.
Kane has filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the claim against it. There is no…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Aldinger v. HowardSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Johnson v. Town of ElizabethtownCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1986
- DeMaio v. Consolidated Rail CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1980
- Potter v. Rain Brook Feed Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 1982
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Leland L. Lockard, Lynette Lockard v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, a Corporation, Rosella Ray D/B/A Rosella Ray's Boarding House. Leland L. Lockard, Lynette Lockard v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, a Corporation, Rosella Ray D/B/A Rosella Ray's Boarding HouseCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
- Mathis v. ParksDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1990
- Young v. Consolidated Rail Corp.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1989
- Lockard v. Missouri Pacific RailroadCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990